Stone's ML King pic dropped over adultery, other, script issues

Discussion in 'TV & Media' started by the G-man, Jan 20, 2014.

  1. the G-man

    the G-man Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Location:
    to your immediate right
    Martin Luther King Jr. biopic dropped by Oliver Stone after script with adultery rejected

    • Oliver Stone announced on Friday he is no longer involved with an upcoming movie about the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. after the studio rejected his script.

      "Sad news. My MLK project involvement has ended. I did an extensive rewrite of the script, but the producers won't go with it," the director wrote on Twitter.

      "The script dealt w/ issues of adultery, conflicts within the movement, and King's spiritual transformation into a higher, more radical being," Stone continued. "I'm told the estate & the 'respectable' black community that guard King's reputation won't approve it. They suffocate the man & the truth. I wish you could see the film I would've made. I fear if 'they' ever make it, it'll be just another commemoration of the March on Washington. Martin, I grieve for you. You are still a great inspiration for your fellow Americans--but, thank God, not a saint."

    Interesting news. Stone is always a vital filmmaker even when he's (and some would say especially when he's) at his most controversial.

    One gets the impression that the studio wanted a "Disneyfied" version of the MLK story.

    And how does his family get to control what is and isn't said about King, any more than the family of any other historical or political figure?
     
  2. Gaith

    Gaith Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Location:
    Washington State
    ^ They own the text to his speeches, so I guess no studio wants to devote the resources necessary to make an MLK film if their actor can't say "I have a dream". One would think those four words wouldn't be enough for a copyright-infringement lawsuit, but more than a line or two might, I guess. They could always write new speeches in King's style, I suppose, but, same objection. And while King was a public figure, maybe the fact that he wasn't an elected official means that his estate can claim ownership over his speeches in a way the Nixon estate, say, can't for his.

    Anyone can make a movie about the Beatles, for example, but that doesn't mean they can have their characters practice "Yesterday" without securing the rights to the song.

    The 80's TV show Sledge Hammer! did a whole ep on Elvis impersonators, but didn't have the budget to license any actual Elvis songs, so the actors could only mumble Elvis-like until the big finally, when Sledge gets to sing... "Battle Hymn of the Republic".



    It does seem a shame. Stone doesn't always make great films, but he's a hell of a filmmaker.


    ETA: Stone is hardly the first person to have come across this problem. An MLK biopic would seem like a no-brainer, and the tension with King's estate always thwarts such efforts. They only want to see a whitewashed (sorry) version of his life, and no filmmaker with the cred to get funding for such a project wants to make a hagiography, nor do they want the estate badmouthing their movie and accusing them of insensitivity if they do make one.

    It's worth noting, however, that King appears as one of several important characters in the pretty-good HBO film Boycott.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2014
  3. JirinPanthosa

    JirinPanthosa Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    I don't get why people feel like if he was adulterous it would in any way diminish his accomplishments.

    I suppose if we can't make a movie showing Christopher Colombus as a sadistic gold hungry mass murderer, it's unthinkable to show an actual great man as anything less than perfect.
     
  4. Gaith

    Gaith Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Location:
    Washington State
    In this case, the "people" are King's direct descendants and family. They presumably feel that their murdered family member's personal indiscretions aren't really anyone's business, far less the millions that would see a movie like this. It's not a helpful attitude when trying to make the best film possible, but it's understandable.
     
  5. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    "Who are you?"
    I've I'd been in a position to reject JFK, I'd have rejected it. The reason is given right in the OP article:

    It's impossible to know whether the rejection of the King film has more merit than Stone would have us believe, without—wait for it—reading the script.

    It would seem that Andrew Young, as quoted in the OP article, suggests that the problem lies more with how King's life would have been dramatized than with actually portraying him as a flawed human being.

    That King had no marital troubles could be an embellishment, but that doesn't mean that Stone's script was free of embellishments of its own.

    Given Stone's track record, I can't give Stone the full benefit of the doubt.
     
  6. Gaith

    Gaith Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Location:
    Washington State
    ^ In Stone's defense, I'm not sure he ever intended JFK to be a particularly historically accurate movie. He's described it as a fictional response to the Warren Report, though I don't know if he said that from the start, and I do think it was a mistake not to include a disclaimer at the beginning, as he subsequently did with the magnificent Nixon.

    Still, your point is entirely valid. We on the outside don't know. It does seem to me, though, that though we're due for a really excellent film on King by now, and JFK also. (Nothing against Bruce Greenwood in Thirteen Days, but that was only a sliver of his career.)
     
  7. Shaka Zulu

    Shaka Zulu Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2013
    Location:
    Bulawayo Military Krral
    Who do they have in mind to direct this movie, if not Stone?
     
  8. Yoda

    Yoda Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Location:
    San Diego
    Wow, what a shitty public domain law we have that the fucking "I have a dream" speech is owned by someone :lol:
     
  9. Robert Maxwell

    Robert Maxwell Comfortably Numb Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Location:
    where it hurts
    Speeches made by US politicians while they are in office cannot be copyrighted--they are automatically public domain. Same goes for any government employee producing a work in the course of their job that would otherwise be copyrightable.

    But King wasn't a government employee, so his works--speeches, letters, etc.--are all copyrighted.

    One could make a more general argument that copyright terms are too long, and I would agree, but I don't think a particular speech should be somehow stripped of its copyright just because it's iconic. It's basically punishing popularity.
     
  10. Yoda

    Yoda Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Location:
    San Diego
    I think with the King speech it's not the popularity which I'd be seeking to punish. It's the obvious historical importance. Or maybe even just the political nature of it. I'm not sure how you'd codify that.

    General copyright terms I'd cut from death plus seventy down to... twenty years from creation for a written work, and maybe thirty for a performance.
     
  11. Gaith

    Gaith Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Location:
    Washington State
    The Wire creator David Simon is now reported developing a six-episode miniseries on MLK for HBO. Says The AV Club: "The project, like so many MLK concepts, has been in the works for several years under the stewardship of Oprah Winfrey—whose drive to make something King-related also extends to the Paramount feature Selma, which she recently signed on to produce." Makes me wonder if the same actor would play King in both works.

    Sounds very promising to me. HBO's John Adams proved that a number of one-hour episodes can be the perfect format for telling a whole historical life on screen, and Simon's credentials are impeccable. As much as I'd like to see Stone's movie, it's easy to picture this being even better. And HBO doesn't seem like the type of studio to be cowed by censoring requests from any family estate...
     
  12. Joel_Kirk

    Joel_Kirk Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    I would like to see the faults and accomplishments of MLK, and let people figure it out themselves. Censoring won't make the project a strong one.
     
  13. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    "Who are you?"
    I see a stupid little typo in my post now, the first word no less, which I can't fix now.
    It should be:
    Blind spots to one's own mistakes are weird.
     
  14. UUS Contrarian

    UUS Contrarian Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2014
    I think the world is ready to retire historical heroes and show historical figures as complex human beings. Just look at recent TV shows.
     
  15. Foxhot

    Foxhot Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2011
    Location:
    Foxhot
    True, though mainstream Hollywood is making a lot less docudramas then they used to. When Stone spoke at the Washington DC Newseum last October, he commented that funding and studio approval was getting far more difficult to make not just Martin Luther King's bio, but movies in the vein of W., NIXON and even JFK. The first two movies were failures in proportion to cost. If even Stone has trouble getting them off the ground, he might be wise to pitch his next projects to HBO...
     
  16. UUS Contrarian

    UUS Contrarian Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2014
    I imagine his projects are hard to fund because of the controversy and bad press.
     
  17. UUS Contrarian

    UUS Contrarian Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2014
    I just hope Oprah will let Simon do his thing.
     
  18. Brolan

    Brolan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    Location:
    With the French nation
    Was King really adulterous? I thought the FBI tapes allegedly proving adultery were manufactured on orders from Hoover?
     
  19. Robert Maxwell

    Robert Maxwell Comfortably Numb Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Location:
    where it hurts
    Ralph Abernathy, a close friend of MLK, said in his autobiography that he and King indeed had extramarital affairs while on the road. It wasn't something they were proud of, but it happened. However, he was quick to say that the reports of King having sex with white prostitutes (or pursuing white women whatsoever) are false.
     
  20. JirinPanthosa

    JirinPanthosa Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    I would think that if you make a speech to a large crowd in a public place it would be assumed to be public domain. The test shouldn't be how iconic the speech is but whether it's made in a public or private forum.
     

Share This Page